According to Wikipedia, there are two ways to use punctation marks when it comes to quoting. Basically, we have the British style, where punctation marks that don't come from the quoted material "is put outside the quote", like I just did. In the American style, on the other hand, punctation marks that belongs to the original sentence, that the quoted material is put within, should be "placed within the quote itself," like I just did.

Now, I really, really, prefer the British style, since this is the way I've always done it, including when I write in my native language. However, at the same time, I prefer to use the american spelling and usage of words. Is this mixing behavior on my part acceptable?

It is mentioned in the Wikipedia article linked to above that "many American style guides specific to certain specialties, such as legal writing and linguistics, prefer British style." However, is there a general rule (or maybe a strong recommendation), for example if I'm just writing an essay or, I don't know, a blogpost, regarding how I can mix the different spellings and punctation mark rules?

My impression is that there are enough Americans who are starting to use "logical" (i.e., British) placement of punctuation inside/outside quotation marks that there is no reason for you to avoid using it. I do recommend being consistent.
–
Peter Shor Nov 19 '11 at 13:57

1

In the case of American/British spelling, the geographic implications of the distinction are relevant, but I think that's far less the case in respect of this particular aspect of punctuation (which could just be called "Style A" and "Style B"). So I agree with @Peter's position that there's no real meaning to what OP calls "mixing behaviour". Consistency within each choice is all that matters. Apart from the obvious (to me) fact that the "American" quoted punctuation style looks illogical - if not actually archaic.
–
FumbleFingersNov 19 '11 at 14:09

You can do whatever you want in your own personal diary...and your self-published works like things on the web, but if a newspaper or journal or book publisher publishes your work, they'll probably want you to stick to just British or just American style (they'll be annoyed by the 'wrong' punctuation or grammar whichever (or both) that it is).
–
MitchDec 13 '11 at 15:52

Haha...I like this passage: "You may follow your own preference in this matter, so long as you are consistent. If you opt for logical punctuation, you will have the satisfaction of knowing that you are on the side of the angels, but you should also expect some grim opposition from the other side."
–
SpeldosaNov 19 '11 at 18:38

1

Can you summarize the intent of the article?
–
MitchDec 13 '11 at 15:46

@Mitch: Best to read the whole passage. It's not very long.
–
Barrie EnglandDec 13 '11 at 16:12

2

Sure, I'm curious and I'll go there, but it's a bit annoying to presume that. The text of your 'answer' isn't an answer as it stands. I'd be nice to get the gist before being required to click through.
–
MitchDec 13 '11 at 16:26

I know a while has passed but I agree with what @Mitch writes. If the link goes unavailable or broken, your answer will become not useful at all. You don't need to quote everything, but a summary, even if schematic, that actually answers the question prevents this and is also easier for the future readers.
–
AlenannoJan 15 '12 at 0:21

The spelling you prefer doesn't have to determine the punctuation style, but if you want to use the British punctuation style using British spelling could work as a clue to the reader that your punctuation isn't incorrect. Or, depending on the reader, it might just make it look like your punctuation and spelling are incorrect.

My own personal rule, as an American, is to put the punctuation inside the quotes unless that results in ambiguity as to whether the punctuation is or isn't part of the quoted text. For example, the sentence:

In the American style, question marks and exclamation marks, unlike periods and commas, are not automatically put inside quotation marks at the end of sentences. This is because they're too tall to sneak under the quotation mark when you're not looking.
–
Peter Shor Nov 19 '11 at 12:07

If you're following American spelling and usage conventions, then you probably ought to adhere to American punctuation as well, for sake of consistency. The Chicago Manual of Style and Robert Bringhurst's Elements of Typographic Style are two sources for advice on usage and punctuation that support American style; whereas if you devise your own hybrid style, you might wind up with a hodge-podge of exceptions and idiosyncratic affectations.

That's not illegal - you're quite free to follow your linguistic muse in the direction it leads you, but your readers may suffer for it.

It's worth noting that British style isn't necessarily easy to apply. British placement depends on whether the quoted material is complete or a fragment. Making that determination in some cases can become a matter of subjective opinion - in which case the American style starts to make a strong case for itself.

Why would readers suffer from British punctuation with American spelling? I can see suffering from inconsistency in punctuation (or in spelling), but I don't see why American spelling demands American punctuation.
–
Peter Shor Nov 19 '11 at 13:53

Per my comment to the original question, I think it's unhelpful to introduce the concept of "consistency" when juxtaposing British/American spelling against the two styles of quote punctuation. Also, I don't think "British style" really depends on whether the the quoted material is complete or a fragment - it's irrelevant whether there was a comma, for instance, in the original material. Although one does sometimes see bizarre attempts at American style such as "Hello." he said.
–
FumbleFingersNov 19 '11 at 14:24